The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-25-2019 Parks Packet CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS 4k PARKS COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2019 6:00 PM AT CITY HALL 1. Call to Order II. Approval of Agenda I11. Approve Parks Commission Minutes—January 28, 2019 (1) IV. Department/ Commission Liaison Reports A. Arborist B. Public Works Director C. Other/ Commission Liaison Report V. Visitors/Public Comment This is an opportunity for the pubhc to address the Commission it ith questions or concerns not on the agenda. Pleose limit comments to three minutes. VI. Public Hearing None VII. Old Business A. Observation Tower— Oak Park Crossing Park (2) VIII. New Business None IX. Informational A. Next Meeting: Monday, March 18 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall B_ Upcoming Council Meeting: Tuesday, February 26 at 6:00 p.m. X. Adjourn Page 1 of 10 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 2 of 10 1 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PARKS COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Monday,January 28, 2019 at City Hall 1. Call to Order: Chair Weyer called the meeting to order. Present. Vice Chair Chirhart, Commissioner Bye, Commissioner Peterson, and Commissioner Thoreson (arrived atter Item IV.), City Administrator Johnson, Public Works Director Kegley, Arborist Danielson. and Commission-Liaison Johnson. Also prc mit: City Planner Scott Richards. Absent: None. II. Approval of Agenda: Vice Chair Chirhart, seconded by Commissioner Bye, moved to approve the Agenda. Carried 4-0. 111, Approve Parks Commission Minutes—December 17, 2018: Commissioner Peterson, seconded by Vice Chair Chirhart, moved to approve the Minutes. Carried 4-0. IV. Department/Commission Liaison Reports: A. :arborist: Arborist Danielson reported that Minnesota.Native Landscapes was a\Nardcd the prairie maintenance project for 2019 at the last City Council meeting. B. Public Works Director: Public Works Director Kegley reported the Public Works Department was working on routine maintenance. C. Other f Commission Liaison Reports: Commission-Liaison Johnson reported that she was appointed the liaison for the Parks Commission at the January 8 City Council meeting. She also reported that Gina Zeuli was extended an offer to continue the summer park program. City Administrator Johnson reported that the holiday event was held on December 28, 2018 at Cover Park, and according to summer park program coordinator Gina Zeuli, there were about 20 to 25 attendees. He also reported he emailed the Parks Commission the central greenway document. V. VisitorPublic Comment: None VI. l'ciblic I learin-,,s: None VII. Old Business: A. Comprehc;nsive Plan—Parks and Trails: City Planner Richards provided an update of the parks and trails section of the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the City Council approved sendin,, the plan to the Metropolitan Council at their last meeting. Vice Chair Chirhart, seconded by Commissioner Bye, moved to recommend the section be sent to the Metropolitan Council with the rest of the Comprehensive Plan. Carried 5- 0. VIII. New Business: A. RFP — Drinking Fountains: Public Works Director Kegley reported that the Parks Page 3 of 10 Parks Commission Minutes January 28, 2019 Page 2 of 2 Commission had expressed interest in having a drinking fountain at Oak Park Crossing Park. Kegley provided the Parks Commission with a draft RFP. He said the plan was to finalize the RFP, submit it to contractors, and come back to the Parks Commission with results. Chair Weyer said the Parks Commission discussed having a drinking fountain at Swager Park as well. City Administrator Johnson suggested the RFP could include an alternate to add a fountain at Swager Park. B. Observation Tower— Oak Park Crossing Park: City Administrator Johnson reported that Councilmember Dougherty contacted the City about the possibility of an observation tower at Oak Park Crossing Park. He requested the Parks Commission discuss the possibility. The Parks Commission thought Oak Park Crossing Park was a great location for a lookout tower. Commissioner Peterson requested a rendering showing what the tower would look like at the park to make sure it was aesthetically pleasing and a review on structural safety. Chair Weyer, seconded by Vice Chair Chirhart, moved to send the lookout tower to the City Council for more research and investigation. Carried 5-0. IX. Annual Meeting of the Parks Commission Commissioner Peterson, seconded by Commissioner Thoreson, moved to adjourn the regular meeting and convene the annual meeting. Carried 5-0. Vice Chair Chirhart, seconded by Commissioner Thoreson, moved to re-appoint Chair Weyer as Chairman. Carried 5-0. Chair Weyer, seconded by Commissioner Bye, moved to re-appoint Commissioner Chirhart as Vice Chair. Carried 5-0. X. Reconvene Regular Meeting Chair Weyer, seconded by Commission Peterson, moved to reconvene the regular meeting. Carried 5-0. XI. Informational: A. Next Meeting: Monday, February 25 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall B. Upcoming Council Meeting: Tuesday, February 26 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall XII. Adiournment: Chair Weyer, seconded by Commissioner Bye, moved to adjourn. Carried 5- 0. Respectfully submitted, Jennifer Pinski City Clerk Page 4 of 10 2 City of oak Park Heights Page I oft 14168 Oak Park BI\d. N .Oak Park Heights,MN 5.5082.Phone(651)439-4439•Fax(651)439-0574 2-22-19 r r TO: Park Commissioners fthatoutlines FROM: Eric Johnson, CityA m'RE: Lookout StructurePlease see the attached MEMO from Stasts related to the continued investigation of such location and installation. Please review the proposal and we can discuss funding sources if the Commission might desire to push this forward a bit further. There are 4 Tasks Noted and can vary... 1 $1,800 2 $1,800, plus 1,500 for expanded 3 $2,560 to$ 3,560 4 $3,200 to $4,400 Total Costs: $9,360 to$13,060 Page 5 of 10 (3 Stantec Kfi]e[III To: Eric Johnson, City Administrator From, Philip Caswell, PE City of Oak Park Heights Stantec-Minneapolis, MN File: TSD Date: February 21,2019 Reference: Existing Steel Stair Tower Relocation As requested,we have investigated the preliminary feasibility of relocating the existing steel stair tower from the Water Street Inn to the buried waste fly ash/park site on the south side of Highway 36, to be used as an overlook. From what we currently know, it is our opinion that the relocation of the structure appears feasible and it could be reused as a public lookout tower. Stantec was requested to propose our services, with the corresponding fee,for the following: 1. Assessing the condition of the existing tower. 2. Providing renderings of the tower on the proposed site to assess the visual impact. 3. Design the foundation for the relocated stair, accounting for the buried fly ash. Each of these is discussed below, including our proposed services and fees. Task#T -Steel Tower Condition Assessment Although we have not yet examined the condition of the existing steel stairs, landings and supports, from a brief review of the photos provided, it appears that the steel has not been damaged and has not lost any of its strength due to corrosion. It should be structurally capable of supporting the loads associated with a public lookout tower. We have reviewed the architectural drawings of the tower and have noted several significant deviations from the drawings and the as-built tower. For example, the drawings show posts only on one side, apparently expecting that the stairs would be attached to and supported by the building on the opposite side. The drawings also call out 6"x 6" square tube steel columns. Though it's difficult to scale, the posts appear to be 4" x 4" square steel tubes in the photos. As a free-standing tower, additional bracing would need to be added to make it stable. It also appears that the bolts are corroded and would likely need to be replaced. A more comprehensive assessment of the tower is necessary to determine whether it is suitable to be relocated and used for an extended period as a lookout tower. In addition to a visual examination, the structural members must be identified, and dimensions measured, so that accurate drawings can be prepared to direct the modifications and reinstallation. We propose to assess the condition of the existing stair tower, including travel, time on site, and preparation of a memo describing the findings, for a lump sum fee of$1,800.00. Task#1 Cost - $1,800 Design vAlh commun'r y in rn�nd ml c:lusersllmannldesktoph ohnsone_caswelip^memo 022019 stair relocation proposal-Imm comments.docx Page 6 of 10 February 21, 2019 Eric Johnson, City Administrator Page 2 of 5 Reference: Existing Steel Stair Tower Relocation Task#2 - Prepare Site Renderings of the Relocated Tower Once the detailed information about the tower has been gathered, a 3-dimensional computer model can be created, then placed onto an aerial photo image to illustrate how the tower would look at its new location. For Task #2, we propose to prepare 3 perspective views of the existing tower at the new site for $1,800.00. The stairs were originally designed only to allow access to the upper floors of the inn. As a lookout, it nnay be desired to expand and enhance the top-level landing, cantilevering it out from the supports. A metal deck with concrete fill could enhance the users experience, while reducing the amount of maintenance required. As an add-on service,we propose to prepare concept graphics of an expanded upper level platform, as well as prepare 3 perspective site renderings of the expanded tower at the new site for an additional $1,500.00. Task#2 Cost - $1,800 Task#2, Expanded platform renderings, Cost - $1,500 Task_# 3 - Foundation Design The existing tower will require a new foundation at the new site. A shallow, combined spread footing, with individual concrete piers supporting each steel column, is the most logical. As an unheated structure, the bottom of the footing should be a minimum of 5'-0" below the ground surface, to protect it from frost heave. However, due to the presence of a separator membrane at 2'-6" below the ground surface, separating the waste fly ash below from the fill soil cap above, the concrete piers would necessarily penetrate the membrane. I spoke with Chuck Donkers,with Xcel Energy,who is familiar with the fly ash and cap. He indicated that penetrating the membrane, constructing the footing, and repairing the membrane afterward would cost on the order of$4,000. He also mentioned that the fly ash is a Class C, meaning that it has some cementitious properties, and would provide a "concrete-like" foundation soil- 60 feet thick. As an alternative to penetrating the membrane to place the footing below, the footing could be placed approximately 1'-0 above the membrane, then fill soil could be brought in to raise grade around the base of the tower to provide the necessary ground cover. This may complicate the adjacent ground slopes, but it will avoid delays that may be associated with obtaining MPCA approval for penetrating and repairing the separator membrane. This configuration is shown in Figure No. 1, below. Under Task #3A,we propose to design the tower foundation, bearing on soil above the separator membrane, for a fee of$2,560. This includes the footing design, preparation of construction drawing(s), and the associated technical specifications. m!c:lusersllmannSdesktopljohnsone_caswellp°memo 022019 stair relocation proposal-Imm comments.docx Page 7 of 10 February 21, 2014 Eric Johnson, City Administrator Page 3 of 5 Reference: Existing Steel Stair Tower Relocation If the footing is designed to bear on soil below the membrane, and requires penetrating and repairing it, the fee for this (Task #313) would instead be $3,560.00. Task#3A, foundation design above membrane, Cost - $2,560 Task#3B, Foundation design penetrating membrane, Cost - $3,560 Tosk#4 - Tower Relocation and Modificoflons Construction Documents What was not requested, but is necessary, is to take the information gathered during the tower condition assessment and incorporate the recommended modifications into construction documents that direct a contractor in how to execute the modifications. Designing and detailing the bracing, replacing bolts, supplementing any deficient components, repainting work, etc. are included in this task. The detailed work will then be described in construction drawings) with the associated technical specifications. The proposed fee for this task #4A, maintaining the existing tower configuration, is$3,200.00. If it is desired to include the expansion of the top landing of the tower, the detailed design of the tower modifications including the expansion and including the expansion in the construction drawing(s), will be Task #4B. The proposed fee to include the expanded platform, Task #413, is$4,400.00. Task#4A, Construction drawings/specifications, Cost - $3,200 Task#413, Include expanded platform, Cost - $4,400 ml c:\usersllmannldesktopljohnsone_caswellp^memo 422019 stair relocation proposal-Imm comments.docx Page 8 of 10 February 21, 2019 Eric Johnson, City Administrator Page 4 of 5 Reference; Existing Steel Stair Tower Relocation -�7m{L-�Prle-q- i�ELocAT�Qi� Qt��c.. PaP�E- l-1'ES.�t`trl *P+gS"-- Ii- _I=II1'11 —lip": III I!I II ii + Ili I'I: 11i i °=111 II ill li hllm�- lu I:. ' IIi I I III— I III ml `_I I � � I I;_ --=111 I III,,=III f l l�l -Ili �Lst• - I iii I I I _. � tea-. 1 t4 �a r-ro sr�.ur e��c�t�r� rim 5 FIGURE NO. 1 -TOWER FOUNDATION CONCEPT, ABOVE MEMBRANE If you would like to discuss any of the above, or potential options not discussed here, or any other matter related to the stair tower, please contact Phil Caswell, at (612) 712-2029 or phil.caswellLstantec.com. If you would like to move forward with any of the work tasks proposed above, please contact me or notify Lee Mann, and we will prepare the necessary paperwork. Thank you for considering Stantec. Stantec ConsultirlCg. Services Inc. ml c:lusersllmannldesktopljohnsone_caswellp"memo 022019 stair relocation proposal-Imm comments.docx Page 9 of 10 February 21,2019 Eric Johnson, City Administrator Page 5 of 5 Reference: Existing Steel Stair Tower Relocation Philip Caswell, PE Senior Associate Phone: 612 712 2029 Phil.Caswell@stantec.com cc Lee Mann—Stantec ml c:lusersllmannldesktopljohnsone_caswellp"memo 022019 stair relocation proposal-Imm comments.docx Page 10 of 10